Patna High Court
Bairistar SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Bairistar Sahani, was arrested on 27‑02‑2026 in connection with FIR No. 49/2026 alleging assault, robbery and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, attacked the informant’s family, stole a gold chain and money. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, the FIR was filed a day after the incident without explanation, and no specific allegation against him was detailed. The State opposed bail, citing four prior criminal antecedents. The Court observed that there was a case‑and‑counter‑case scenario and no specific allegation against the petitioner, and therefore granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences and prior criminal antecedents
- Whether the lack of specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR warrants bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- assault
- theft
- prior criminal antecedents
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29481 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2026 Thana- SHIKARGANJ District- East Champaran
======================================================
Bairistar Sahani S/o- Pargan Sahani R/v- Godhiya Ps- Shikarganj Dist- East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Shantanu Kumar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
27.02.2026 in connection with Shikarganj P.S. Case No. 49 of
2026, F.I.R. dated 25.02.2026 for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109,
303(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, on 24.02.2026 at
around 03.00 P.M, when the informant’s father and brother has
gone to the garden with a mango trader to spray medicine, then
the petitioner along with other accused persons attacked them
with lathi, farsa ad iron rod was there and when the informant
came to save his family members, the accused persons assaulted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29481 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/4
him also. Thereafter the accused persons snatched gold chain of
informant’s brother worth Rs. 1, 45,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- from
the informant’s pocket.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The present case is counter blast of Shikarganj P.S.
Case No. 48 of 2026. It appears from the FIR that date of the
occurrence was on 24.02.2026 but the FIR was lodge on
25.02.2026 i.e. after delay of one day without giving any
explanation of delay and apart from that the present FIR has
been filed by the informant only to save his own skin in
connection with Shikarganj P.S. Case No. 48 of 2026. Although
the petitioner is named in the FIR and there is specific allegation
against him in the FIR that he assaulted to the father of the
informant but the informant has nowhere stated in the FIR that
on which part the petitioner had assaulted his father. He further
submits that the petitioner is in custody since 27.02.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner carries four criminal antecedents other
than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of
paragraph-3 of the bail application that the petitioner is on bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29481 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
3/4
in the said matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
there is case and counter case between the parties and there is no
specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sikarahana, Dhaka, East
Champaran, Motihari in connection with Shikarganj P.S. Case
No. 49 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29481 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
4/4
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…